[jonKranked]

There's been a lot of discussion (on other sites) in regards to Apple's seemingly arbitrary review process for apps. I knew it was just a matter of time, but its finally happened. Someone has ceased app development for the iPhone.

http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/11/11/joe-hewitt-developer-of-facebooks-massively-popular-iphone-app-quits-the-project/

http://www.engadget.com/2009/11/12/facebook-app-developer-rejects-app-store-irony-ensues/

My decision to stop iPhone development has had everything to do with Apple’s policies. I respect their right to manage their platform however they want, however I am philosophically opposed to the existence of their review process. I am very concerned that they are setting a horrible precedent for other software platforms, and soon gatekeepers will start infesting the lives of every software developer.

The web is still unrestricted and free, and so I am returning to my roots as a web developer. In the long term, I would like to be able to say that I helped to make the web the best mobile platform available, rather than being part of the transition to a world where every developer must go through a middleman to get their software in the hands of users.”

Granted, the Facebook app was handed off to someone else and not dropped altogether. But I think this says a lot about the situation, especially considering Facebook is one of the most popular apps, across all smartphones. Not just the iPhone.

 

[binary visions]

Yep, interesting. Apple has historically kept extremely tight control over their platforms, so it's not surprising to see the app store carry on this legacy, but I think, with this platform, they're getting a little too big for their britches to be keeping this kind of iron-clad control over the applications.

Partly why I'm really happy to see the Android platform getting some serious backing. If open source apps can give some serious competition, it will either force Apple to adopt new review policies, or give me an alternative to switch to

 

[jonKranked]

I think open source apps will definitely come out ahead in the long run (and I'm not saying this just as philosophical believer in open source).

To me, part of it has to do with the nature of owning a cell phone. Nowadays, they are more or less designed to have a 2 year life cycle. I have a hard time paying for an application on a device I will have for 2 years tops. I'm sure there are plenty of others who feel this way.


Currently, all the apps I have on my Blackberry are free.

edit: I lied. I payed $4.99 for 1000 hard level sudoku puzzles. I'm about 25% done with them (I play 2 or 3 games a day on average). Once this is done, there is sudoku extreme (1000 even harder puzzles). I don't know what I'll do when I beat all of those.

 

[binary visions]

Well, app costs are low. If you buy into a platform, you do a little better because you can stick with that platform even if you upgrade your phone. In any event, this is partly why apps are inexpensive. The only apps that I have that cost more than $2 (and I only have a few pay-for apps anyway) are PDAnet, because it actually made me money and paid for itself dozens of times over, LogMeIn for the same reason, and the birding app because I was interested. So, all told, I've actually been out of pocket on like $25 worth of apps. Not really a big expense.

 

[jonKranked]

Generally, app costs are low. However, I have seen apps in RIM's app world that exceed $20 (a few are $50).

I can definitely see the benefits of certain apps if you have a work issued device.

 

[syadasti]

See also - http://www.ridemonkey.com/forums/showthread.php?t=225610

Apple is over the top on the iPhone/iPod touch, their Motorola, PPC, and Intel computers never had this process - you could get applications from anyone. RIM has always had the same approach as Macs and PC (as should any other platform). An app store is not necessary and should not be mandatory.

 

[jonKranked]

Yea I had seen that.

Did you see the one where Apple rejected an e-book? It was - get this - a reference guide on how to use an iPhone. It got rejected because apparently you aren't allowed to use the word "iPhone" in an app. Which doesn't make sense, because there are already other approved apps that use that very word.

 

[IH8Rice]

Yea I had seen that.

Did you see the one where Apple rejected an e-book? It was - get this - a reference guide on how to use an iPhone. It got rejected because apparently you aren't allowed to use the word "iPhone" in an app. Which doesn't make sense, because there are already other approved apps that use that very word.

they did approve it in the end
http://www.engadget.com/2009/11/03/apple-rejects-macworld-iphone-superguide-from-app-store-for-u/

 

[jonKranked]

Another interesting piece about the shortcomings of the app store review process:

http://gigaom.com/2009/11/13/cupertino-you-have-a-problem/

good read. They all but call the review process the achille's heel.

 

[MtnBikerChk]

Anybody see Curb last night?

Apparently, George makes millions with his iphone app - the itoilet!! and in true Costanza fashion, loses it all when he invests with Madoff.

 

[jonKranked]

More app store drama:

http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/12/apple-expels-1000-apps-from-store-after-developer-scam/

Summary: Company has a thousand or so apps in the store. Many happen to be so-so clones of popular software. Problem is, they all have very high (5 star reviews) that were poorly written, and by people who pretty much only reviewed this company's software. Apple removes all apps by this company after discovering the fraudulent reviews.

#1 - It's kinda scary that Apple can do this, yet not force the company to refund the people who bought it's apps.

#2 - What has Apple done to prevent this in the future?